Ed Rob Menard's FOTL Claims

[Boot2TheHead]

since it is clear her intent

So now you claim to be psychic? I wonder what old Randi would think about that claim on this forum! LOL

FAIL!

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrisy

 

[FreemanMenard]

After reading and seeing your "work" I find it hard to believe you make more than the minimum required for filing. If you make more, You wouldn't mind declaring how much so your claims could be verified, right?

What part of 'private two party contract' do you not understand? What I earn is none of your business, and I feel no obligation to reveal to you or others that amount. Why would you even think I should? But if you want to do the math, $30-$50 square foot is a close approximation for my masonry work, depending on the job, when I am working with river rock or stone. Blocks are less.

 

[FreemanMenard]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrisy

Deducing ones intent based upon their actions, is not the same as claiming to know what they think!

 

[Boot2TheHead]

Yes, it is, actually.

I don't think you know the meaning of any of the words you are using at any time.

What do you think intent is?

 

[Bishop]

Wow... that is not my argument at all.... I said nothing along those lines, I merely pointed out she did not mention it, was aware of it, and since it is clear her intent, she must have had a reason for not mentioning it. I did not state her reason was an acceptance. Did not even think that.

She did not mention it and there is a reason she did not mention it. That can't be argued.

Now you try to claim I stated the reason is SHE ACCEPTED it. Thanks for playing. Take up macramé. You suck at logic.

Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot that freemen have a different definition of "accept" to the rest of the world.

That irrelevant objection aside, my point stands. Your premise of "She did not mention it, was aware of it..." is wrong, because she is not "aware" of it. And she is not "aware" of it because it isn't true. The real police do not "recognize" C3PO at all. It's just another one of your many, many lies.

 

[Bishop]

I don't think you know the meaning of any of the words you are using at any time.

Heh. I suppose it would be a little too obvious to post a link to the scene that we're all thinking about right now, wouldn't it?

 

[FreemanMenard]

Yes, it is, actually.

I don't think you know the meaning of any of the words you are using at any time.

What do you think intent is?

Yet still you persist in trying to communicate with me.

<SNIP>

Edited, breach of rule 0, rule 12.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar

 

[Boot2TheHead]

[Nevermind]

 

[Stacey Grove]

Pretty sure in her research she found evidence that the police recognize that we (3CPO) are in fact true Peace Officers.

What makes you think that, Rob?
What evidence can you offer to back up your claim that you believe she came to the conclusion the police recognise the status of your 3CPO?

 

[arayder]

WTF is wrong with you?

Our subject has an inflated sense of his own importance and a deep need for admiration as we see expressed in his failed comedy career and his endless stream of self-aggrandizing YouTubes.

He believes he is superior to others (indeed, claiming a high I.Q.) and has little regard for how his doctrines have adversely effect them, as we see in his dismissals of those harmed by his “teachings“.

Behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism, as we see evidenced in the subject’s need to respond with angry or dismissive replies to nearly every post critical of him. These posts demonstrate volatile, unstable emotions, consistent with his state of mind.

Our subject’s attitudes and behaviors do not reflect true self-confidence. Instead, they conceal a deep sense of insecurity and a fragile self-esteem.

Despite his claims of a normal job it is likely that our subject has a limited ability to function in the work place.

 

[azzthom]

Our subject has an inflated sense of his own importance and a deep need for admiration as we see expressed in his failed comedy career and his endless stream of self-aggrandizing YouTubes.

He believes he is superior to others (indeed, claiming a high I.Q.) and has little regard for how his doctrines have adversely effect them, as we see in his dismissals of those harmed by his “teachings“.

Behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism, as we see evidenced in the subject’s need to respond with angry or dismissive replies to nearly every post critical of him. These posts demonstrate volatile, unstable emotions, consistent with his state of mind.

Our subject’s attitudes and behaviors do not reflect true self-confidence. Instead, they conceal a deep sense of insecurity and a fragile self-esteem.

Despite his claims of a normal job it is likely that our subject has a limited ability to function in the work place.

There also seems to be a sort of Paranoid Delusion on his part, which may be unique, in that he imagines himself to be the persecutor (of the government) rather than the persecuted. He imagines all sorts of powers, abilities and rights which are not internally consistent, so naturally he chooses not to use them. This is because, sub-consciously at least, some part of him knows that the fantasy would collapse if he did try to use them. The access to great wealth he also imagines is entirely consistent with this fantasy, as again, he 'chooses' not to use it.

 

[Jon.]

Avoid / Evade

6 of one / Half dozen of the other

That version of word games won't impress or convince the CRA inspector.

Um, the courts, (you know those things you guys bow to unquestioningly) distinguish between evading and avoiding. Again, thanks for playing!

Actually, Rob is right here. Tax avoidance is legally managing your affairs so as to minimize the payment of taxes (eg. contributing to your RRSP, claiming all your deductions, making charitable donations, etc.). Tax evasion is failing or refusing to pay taxes that you legitimately owe.

Where Rob is wrong is in his characterization of his own actions. He does have a SIN, for all his protestations to the contrary, but that doesn't matter. SIN or no SIN, he is obliged to file tax returns if (as he says) he earns more than the statutory minimum, and to pay taxes if the calculations on the returns result in tax owing. Refusing to do so is tax evasion, pure and simple, and if he is caught, he could be in deep. But he refuses to see that, because that would mean that everything he's trying to sell is a mirage, and he won't admit to that. Even to himself.

 

[DGM]

What part of 'private two party contract' do you not understand? What I earn is none of your business, and I feel no obligation to reveal to you or others that amount. Why would you even think I should? But if you want to do the math, $30-$50 square foot is a close approximation for my masonry work, depending on the job, when I am working with river rock or stone. Blocks are less.

Do you reveal this number to the revenue service? They wouldn't have a problem if you did, right?

 

[FreemanMenard]

Actually, Rob is right here. Tax avoidance is legally managing your affairs so as to minimize the payment of taxes (eg. contributing to your RRSP, claiming all your deductions, making charitable donations, etc.). Tax evasion is failing or refusing to pay taxes that you legitimately owe.

Where Rob is wrong is in his characterization of his own actions. He does have a SIN, for all his protestations to the contrary, but that doesn't matter. SIN or no SIN, he is obliged to file tax returns if (as he says) he earns more than the statutory minimum, and to pay taxes if the calculations on the returns result in tax owing. Refusing to do so is tax evasion, pure and simple, and if he is caught, he could be in deep. But he refuses to see that, because that would mean that everything he's trying to sell is a mirage, and he won't admit to that. Even to himself.

Well, Jon, I guess all you (or some government or CRA agent) has to do is prove in a court of law, that you can force me to associate with a number contrary to my own will. And contrary to the Bill of Rights. I know folks in the CRA did not feel comfortable trying to make that claim, and refused to even try, but I guess you are smarter than all their lawyers put together, and can do so.

I challenge you to try.

What is my SIN?
How will you force me to use, acknowledge and associate with it?

GOOD LUCK!

 

[FreemanMenard]

Do you revile this number to the revenue service? They wouldn't have a problem if you did, right?

Typo right? I am assuming you meant reveal. (my fingers are often sausage like too. I AM NOT making fun of your typo, simply seeking clarification.)

Why would I reveal it to them?
They are not a party to my contracts, and I have no association with them.

 

[D'rok]

Well, Jon, I guess all you (or some government or CRA agent) has to do is prove in a court of law, that you can force me to associate with a number contrary to my own will. And contrary to the Bill of Rights. I know folks in the CRA did not feel comfortable trying to make that claim, and refused to even try, but I guess you are smarter than all their lawyers put together, and can do so.

I challenge you to try.

What is my SIN?
How will you force me to use, acknowledge and associate with it?

GOOD LUCK!

And the old switcheroo again. Obviously, Jon can't force you to do anything of the sort. Nor did he claim to be able to.

Don't you get tired of the same transparent tactics?

 

[FreemanMenard]

There also seems to be a sort of Paranoid Delusion on his part, which may be unique, in that he imagines himself to be the persecutor (of the government) rather than the persecuted. He imagines all sorts of powers, abilities and rights which are not internally consistent, so naturally he chooses not to use them. This is because, sub-consciously at least, some part of him knows that the fantasy would collapse if he did try to use them. The access to great wealth he also imagines is entirely consistent with this fantasy, as again, he 'chooses' not to use it.

So now you speak confidently of what I imagine? Are you qualified to provide a psychological evaluation of those whom you have never met? Are you a psychic who knows what others imagine?

 

[D'rok]

What makes you think that, Rob?
What evidence can you offer to back up your claim that you believe she came to the conclusion the police recognise the status of your 3CPO?

Rob?

 

[FreemanMenard]

And the old switcheroo again. Obviously, Jon can't force you to do anything of the sort. Nor did he claim to be able to.

Don't you get tired of the same transparent tactics?

And neither can any government lawyer, agent or court.

No switcheroo, just pointing out the challenge any who tried would face.

So wanna address the point now D'Rok? Or just seek to avoid the point by talking about switcheroos?

How can ANY government agent, lawyer or court force me to associate with a number against my will?

Speak to that...

 

[DGM]

Typo right? I am assuming you meant reveal. (my fingers are often sausage like too. I AM NOT making fun of your typo, simply seeking clarification.)

Why would I reveal it to them?
They are not a party to my contracts, and I have no association with them.

Yes it was a typo.

OK, I understand now. I suppose as long as you don't use any of the amenities of the country (roads, health care, public spaces and such) you should not have to pay.

Do I have this right?